Montgomery, AL - HDTV - Page 208

Unfortunately the post above is factually incorrect (but is the mantra that TMN is so well known for). The facts are that both STN and TMN use what's known in the industry as http based testing. In the case of STN what you the user sees as flashy eye candy is NOT the actual test but in fact is a graphical representation of the test progression designed to keep your attention. In reality both use the same general method for testing behind the scenes which amounts to downloading a highly compressed file of a specific size and then computing the result based on the time it takes to download that file.

While this testing method is fine for short hauls it becomes increasingly inaccurate as the distance from the test server increases. BOTH of these tests also fail to properly measure the key component of broadband connections that matters far more than speed and that is datarate consistency aka QoS. You can have a broadband connection claiming to offer you 100mbps but if it fluctuates wildly it's of no more value than it's lowest point of fluctuation especially as it applies to single socket applications like streaming and gaming.

Currently there is only one testing platform that accurately and consistently tests speeds AND QoS and especially over longer distances available to consumers using a TCP socket based method and that is the platform offered by any site that uses Visualware software. It's also the very same platform used by the majors like Cisco, Juniper, AT&T you name it behind the scenes.

As for the HTTP based tests like STN and TMN the only industry accepted test would be that of STN (aka Ookla) but again I caution you to test to your closest server only and you must understand that its only giving you part of the broadband connection equation. You are still missing the most inportant test which is datarate consistency.

TMN does a great job of talking the talk and their schpeal is certainly convincing enough....but don't bite the hype...because that's all it is especially when they compare themselves to STN...for all intents they are one in the same tests with different visual packaging and nothing more. The huge difference between them is that STN offers countless thousands of server opportunities and their core software by Ookla is industry accepted whereas TMN offers just one main with a few extra donated servers and is not industry accepted.

I got the same results with TMN and Knology's test.

And DU Meter is running on my desktop which verified the test.

I have a friend in Mtgy that's claiming 75Mbps with Charter using a docsis3 Modem?

and testmy.net 6.1 mbps download and 1.7 upload.

I have Rod Runner Turbo which is supposed to be 20 mbps.

4:00 AM

how do you get the test screen picture to post on the forum. I use to have screen grab it program but lost it.This moring my download speed was 17.I agree with yall. Speed needs to be steady.
I watch movies on the Vudu site. 1080P Dolby Digital. It is streamed and without the speed of at least 4.5 kpbs lots of buffering.Daughter plays online games and she seems happy.

My speed with Brighthouse is never steady. I got RR Turbo so I could watch the MLB.TV app on my TV. You can tell the speed changes constantly as the picture goes in and out of HD and buffers quite often. Also, the signal drops at least once per ballgame.

RR Turbo forces your browser through their proxy server, which will help with normal web page loading, it compresses the files...that's why your speedtest.net speeds are faster than your actual speed...

It's very good for normal browsing, your web pages will load faster and use fewer bytes...the turbo client at your end decompresses the web page content.

However, for normal file downloads, viewing streaming video or audio, turbo will not improve your speeds, and in some cases will slow them down...any file format that is already compressed, like downloading a .zip or.exe, or viewing video that is already compressed as in .jpg/.mpg or audio in .mp3, downloading software updates, like from Windows Update, can not be helped with Turbo, and in many cases, actually slowed down.

Some web sites also refuse to work with certain proxy servers, so if you ever hit a web page that refuses to load, turn off Turbo mode and try it.

Many folks use the free Opera browser because it has a free turbo mode built into the browser, but allows the user to control it by selecting the ON/OFF option...the Opera Turbo mode also forces the browser to use Opera's proxy server which compressed the data and sends it to the browser, which decompresses it.

Opera is ideal for folks with dial-up or slow DSL (slow being <5mbs)..

With all due respect RR Turbo has nothing to do with proxies, that is not at all how Turbo works. Turbo will not impact your downloading negatively in any way...in fact quite the contrary. You also cannot turn off or regulate Turbo in any way at the user level. The only impact Turbo has on speed tests is that no speed test can take into account the turbo boost timeframe for their test because the technology and timing is implemented differently for each provider. Therefore your test results will almost always reflect the Turbo Boost speeds (which are higher for a short period of time) and not the actual cap speeds. Not sure where you got this information from but you might consider a different source.

This has nothing to do with Turbo. Turbo boost gives you additional bandwidth for XX number of bytes initially transfered and then ramps down to the normal cap of 20mbps. In your case the MLB servers are a bit overloaded...this is a known problem and has been a common complaint since they started offering the service. My hope is that it will improve in time as they learn how to balance things better.

If however you suspect a possible service issue please email me your modem MAC or IP address to BHNtechXpert@mybrighthouse.com and I will be happy to take a look.

You're right..the Roadrunner version of Turbo is a higher priced speed tier and requires a special modem..

This is what other forums said:

Almost all those "turbo" things - every provider has their own pet name for them - are little more than HTTP proxies (or accelerators). And since HTTP protocol is pretty much limited to web browsing, there's quite probably no RoadRunner "turbo boost" for NetFlix and gaming.

But other users pointed this out:

Huh? What are you talking about? Road Runner Turbo is a speed tier. Standard Road Runner speed is 10Mb down in most areas. In most areas Road Runner Turbo is 15Mb Down and 1Mb or 2Mb Up and is an extra $10/month. The modem is reprovisioned for faster speeds. Powerboost is a technology created by Comcast and licensed by other cable companies to provide a temporary burst of speed lasting for 20-30 seconds in which you get the available unused bandwidth on your node and can max out at 30-35Mb downstream. It’s no proxy or accelerator, the speeds are real and powerboost can be seen when downloading files, streaming video and whatnot. Download a large file from a source that can support higher speeds and you will see the download transfer rate really high and it will slowly drop off to 15Mb. Powerboost also provides video streaming with an extra kick. Watch a high quality video on YouTube and see how quickly the buffer builds up.

With Opera you can get Turbo mode for free, it uses their proxy server to accomplish the extra speed by compressing at their servers and letting the browser decompress after it is received...this also reduces a customer's bandwidth use if they are on a plan that has limits on how much they can use in a month or day...it works with any ISP or package level,...but it will advise you to turn Turbo off if you have a fast connection =>5mbs...

Edit:

I'm in the boonies with no access to DSL, cable or wireless...been using Wildblue Satellite internet for several years...late last year they launched a new technology satellite, ViaSat-1, and I was switched to it in February....advertised speeds are 12mbs down and 3mbs up...I get more like 18mbs down and 2.6mbs up..

This satellite also uses a technology called AcceleNet...which does the compression at the gateway servers and the new modem has firmware built-in to de-compress the bit stream...this also reduces my measured usage by about 40-50%...as you probably know all satellite ISP plans have very strict usage caps...I'm on the cheap plan with a 8gB limit that resets to zero every month on my billing date...so the AcceleNet technology is very important to satellite internet customers..

Sigh...wrong again...seriously these sources of information should not be relied upon. Turbo does NOT require a special modem. It's a docsis 2 and 3 product and any run of the mill D2 or D3 modem on your providers approved modem list will be fine (its not an approved for Turbo list...its an approved to connect to the network list).

Web accelerators as you referred to with Opera have NOTHING in common with Turbo Boost technology at all and shouldn't be compared in any way. It's like comparing a dog to an ape and saying they are related. Lets not forget that Opera in general sucks, is prone to memory leaks of the worst kind and compared to other browsers is huge in memory requirements. It's a pig pure and simple....and ya know what they say...you can put lipstick on a pig...but its still a pig.

Well Duhh...It's the INTERNET..so it has to be correct.

LOL well he has been posting as though its fact (only in the last did he reference the source)

I respectfully disagree. I've been using and testing it since the days when they had ads and it's always been a better product as far as customization and speed goes, especially for those of us on older computers.

I've got 11 tabs open right now and there's not a hint of lag, even though it IS a memory hog (it's using 400 MB of memory at the moment.) I can't even do this with Chrome, as it slows to a crawl with more than 5 tabs open. And it also renders some content slower than Opera.

I wouldn't recommend Opera to noobs who are clueless about how anything computer-related works, but for power users it's a really great alternative to Chrome. FF and IE and Safari just aren't even in the same league with those two. If there are issues, it's usually due to browser sniffing on the website's end, and masking as FF clears up some problems. For the other .1% of incompatible websites I use Chrome or FF. Chrome has gotten just as bad, though, for sites that don't load properly. I'm depending on it less and less lately because it keeps finding ways to let me down. Not to mention there's little you can do to customize it.

Thanks for sharing the internet knowledge. I learn something new on this forum everyday

Yep, I have IE8, latest Firefox, latest Opera and latest Chrome installed and compare them all..

My personal favorite, and the one I'm using right now is Chrome, but Firefox is also a favorite because of the large number of add-ons that are available for it..

Only use IE8 on patch Tuesday (which, btw, is tomorrow) to do Windows Update....I disable auto-update on everything that has that option...prefer to do it myself and watch the process in case there's a hiccup...☺☺☺

BTW....the use of the word "Turbo" implies to most serious internet geeks that it normally involves a proxy server and some type of accelerator..Propel is an example, as is the turbo mode in Opera.

This is what I saw about RR Turbo modems:

DOCSIS 1.1 or higher cable modems are capable of receiving PowerBoost™, regardless of cable modem type. Subscription to Road Runner Turbo is required.

Road Runner tier data rates vary by level of service and area. The maximum advertised speeds [3] for these services are:

Lite: 1 Mbit/s / 1 Mbit/s
Basic: 1.5 Mbit/s / 256 or 384 kbit/s, or 3.0 Mbit/s / 1 Mbit/s (depending on market)
Standard: 7 Mbit/s or 10 Mbit/s / 384 kbit/s or 512 kbit/s or 1 Mbit/s [4] (bursts: 15 Mbit/s / 512 kbit/s or 1 Mbit/s) (depending on market)
Turbo: 10 Mbit/s or 15 Mbit/s / 512 kbit/s or 768 kbit/s or 1 Mbit/s[4] (bursts: 25 Mbit/s / 512 kbit/s or 1 Mbit/s) (depending on market)
Broadband Turbo Plus: 20 Mbit/s / 1 to 5 Mbit/s (this service tier is only available in California and Texas)
Extreme: 30 Mbit/s / 5 Mbit/s[4]
Ultimate Internet: 50 Mbit/s / 5 Mbit/s[4]
Road Runner® Lite competes directly with less expensive DSL service, offering a lower bandwidth for a similar cost. The specific data rate varies, but the average is 768 kbit/s downstream and 128 kbit/s upload. Road Runner® Broadband Turbo with PowerBoost® (form. Road Runner Premium) gives up to 25 Mbit/s download and 1 Mbit/s upload (in 16 second bursts based on network conditions). Cost and speed tiers vary by area, and pricing packages are heavily slanted to drive consumers toward the declining home phone and cable television services.

The new Ultimate Internet and Extreme service tier offerings are a part of Time Warner Cable's rollout of the DOCSIS 3 upgrade.

Depends on which one. On Speedtest click share and then click copy url.
Then click on the image tag at the top of your new message window and paste the URL in.

Thank you

On TMN after the test is complete scroll all the way to the bottom of the page and click image url and paste the same way as above.


On the knology shot I copied the screen shot, with Alt + Print Screen, pasted in paint, and cropped it. Then hosted the picture on my own web photo gallery and hyper linked the URL here in a similar fashion.

So how does one get WSFA_WAKA_WNCF_WBMM_WCOV AND APT in HD on this internet stuff? I mean.. I hate to interrupt this internet forum for HDTV!

Using Speedtest.net, here are my results between Wetumpka and Atlanta using Brighthouse's Turbo on Roadrunner.



Please comment on this.

In case anyone is curious about Brighthouse networks speed seeming to get slower, it looks like are coming out or have come out with "roadrunner lightning" so they can charge more for the same thing.

http://brighthouse.com/birmingham/shop/internet/plans

Jim, please post your speed test results from testmy.net...run the Testmy Download option and use a large file, 12mB's or larger, then run the Testmy Upload option and use the 7.5mB, or larger, file size for your test.

Speedtest.net is not a reliable speed test indicator for comparing your speeds on different days, or at different times..

http://testmy.net/

bama

Have to leave for the morning. Will get back sometime this afternoon. Thanks for the help.

I don't think we are getting lightning in our area. For some reason, Brighthouse gives the Elmore area the second-class treatment when it comes to services such as internet speed, HD channels and on-demand. Birmingham Brighthouse has lighting, on-demand and over 120 HD channels. I guess we need a little competition here to get them to upgrade our area. I've heard Knology is coming in.

Brighthouse does have good customer service and the HD picture quality is great. The internet is not consistent though. I just wish we were given the same services treatment as their other areas. Lighting is available in most Brighthouse areas expect ours.

Just curious why you are still using IE8 and not 9? I had given up on IE until 9 came out and it is 10x better then any previous IE. While it is better, I still use Chrome for 90% of my browsing. I just love Chrome Sync to much to give it up, I hope Google releases Chrome with Chrome Sync for iOS one day, then I'd be in internet heaven. I use to love FF but then it got way over bloated but, the past few major updates have really help bring it closer to what it once was.

Tom, when was the last time you tried Chrome? I currently have 9 tabs open in Chrome and it is just as fast as it is with 1. I've given Opera a number of chances and it is just to slow compared to the others IMO, although it is still better then Safari for Windows. Safari is a piece of junk on Windows, Apple should be embarrassed to have released such a horrible product.

I'd rank the current browsers as followed:

1 - Chrome
2 - IE9
3 - FF
.
.
.
.
.
.
10 - Opera
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
100 - Safari

http://www.speedtest.net/result/1886630116.png
Disappointing

I use it two or three times a week, often with 20+ tabs open. After four or five tabs it just has blank pages that don't render until you click on the tab and wait, whereas Opera is a memory hog with that many tabs, but all the tabs are ready and waiting at a moment's notice.

Remember, I'm on a very old (but otherwise very useful) system running XP, with just 2 GB of RAM. Chrome's just not very well optimized for older setups like mine unless there's under 5 tabs open, which is not how I work! I have to keep using it though because a site I depend on has a special extension only for Chrome.

Chrome is far better than Opera but both do serious numbers on memory. In the case of Opera its a blatent memory leak which manifests over time...you can just leave a browser window open overnight compare starting memory used and ending...it will shock you. Chrome on the otherhand does unique things with memory...its not so much a leak but the way they handle it and then fail to release it once there is no longer a need....google of course always has an excuse but either way you look at it they both impact available memory over time which for some is an obvious problem.

On testmy.net, download(using 12meg file) ranges from 4.98, 15.22, 12.21.

Upload speed using 17.5mb setting shows 1.9mbps .